Ad is loading...
CUCSF
Price
$0.43
Change
-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Updated
Dec 1 closing price
HTWSF
Price
$1.34
Change
-$0.01 (-0.74%)
Updated
Nov 15 closing price
Ad is loading...

CUCSF vs HTWSF

Header iconCUCSF vs HTWSF Comparison
Open Charts CUCSF vs HTWSFBanner chart's image
China Communications Services
Price$0.43
Change-$0.00 (-0.00%)
Volume$1.63K
CapitalizationN/A
Helios Towers
Price$1.34
Change-$0.01 (-0.74%)
Volume$9.8K
CapitalizationN/A
CUCSF vs HTWSF Comparison Chart
Loading...
View a ticker or compare two or three
VS
CUCSF vs. HTWSF commentary
Nov 18, 2024

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is CUCSF is a Hold and HTWSF is a Hold.

COMPARISON
Comparison
Nov 18, 2024
Stock price -- (CUCSF: $0.43 vs. HTWSF: $1.34)
Brand notoriety: CUCSF and HTWSF are both not notable
Both companies represent the Wireless Telecommunications industry
Current volume relative to the 65-day Moving Average: CUCSF: 100% vs. HTWSF: 118%
Market capitalization -- CUCSF: $3.29B vs. HTWSF: $1.22B
CUCSF [@Wireless Telecommunications] is valued at $3.29B. HTWSF’s [@Wireless Telecommunications] market capitalization is $1.22B. The market cap for tickers in the [@Wireless Telecommunications] industry ranges from $12.88T to $0. The average market capitalization across the [@Wireless Telecommunications] industry is $17.36B.

Long-Term Analysis

It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is undervalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).

CUCSF’s FA Score shows that 1 FA rating(s) are green whileHTWSF’s FA Score has 0 green FA rating(s).

  • CUCSF’s FA Score: 1 green, 4 red.
  • HTWSF’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
According to our system of comparison, CUCSF is a better buy in the long-term than HTWSF.

Price Growth

CUCSF (@Wireless Telecommunications) experienced а 0.00% price change this week, while HTWSF (@Wireless Telecommunications) price change was -5.63% for the same time period.

The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Wireless Telecommunications industry was +9.09%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -0.56%, and the average quarterly price growth was +62.93%.

Industries' Descriptions

@Wireless Telecommunications (+9.09% weekly)

Wireless Telecom includes companies that sell wireless antenna or satellite-based communication services. This is the fastest-growing area in communications, as more and more communication and computing happen on mobile devices and cloud-based platforms. Wireless telecom is a key industry for global connectivity, and has even further room for growth in emerging markets and in rural parts of developed nations. People’s growing need for speed in data connectivity, higher resolution, and smoother video streaming and multimedia applications should drive growth and competition within this segment. T-Mobile US, Inc., Vodafone Group, and Sprint Corporation are some major providers of wireless telecom.

FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
CUCSF($3.29B) has a higher market cap than HTWSF($1.22B). HTWSF YTD gains are higher at: 15.517 vs. CUCSF (0.000). CUCSF has higher annual earnings (EBITDA): 3.79B vs. HTWSF (113M). CUCSF has more cash in the bank: 19.5B vs. HTWSF (389M). HTWSF has less debt than CUCSF: HTWSF (1.47B) vs CUCSF (2.53B). CUCSF has higher revenues than HTWSF: CUCSF (139B) vs HTWSF (502M).
CUCSFHTWSFCUCSF / HTWSF
Capitalization3.29B1.22B269%
EBITDA3.79B113M3,350%
Gain YTD0.00015.517-
P/E Ratio7.86N/A-
Revenue139B502M27,689%
Total Cash19.5B389M5,013%
Total Debt2.53B1.47B172%
FUNDAMENTALS RATINGS
CUCSF: Fundamental Ratings
CUCSF
OUTLOOK RATING
1..100
50
VALUATION
overvalued / fair valued / undervalued
1..100
14
Undervalued
PROFIT vs RISK RATING
1..100
100
SMR RATING
1..100
72
PRICE GROWTH RATING
1..100
71
P/E GROWTH RATING
1..100
81
SEASONALITY SCORE
1..100
n/a

Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.

TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
RSI
ODDS (%)
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Momentum
ODDS (%)
MACD
ODDS (%)
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Advances
ODDS (%)
Declines
ODDS (%)
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Aroon
ODDS (%)
View a ticker or compare two or three
Ad is loading...
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
MFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
FEQTX31.03-0.10
-0.32%
Fidelity Equity Dividend Income
IUCEX24.61-0.19
-0.77%
JPMorgan International Focus C
LSVQX20.14-0.17
-0.84%
LSV Small Cap Value Institutional
SSEAX11.40-0.10
-0.87%
SEI Screened World Equity Ex-US A (SIIT)
BSDKX13.55-0.32
-2.31%
BlackRock SMID-Cap Growth Equity K

CUCSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that CUCSF and TTRAF have been poorly correlated (+17% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that CUCSF and TTRAF's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CUCSF
1D Price
Change %
CUCSF100%
N/A
TTRAF - CUCSF
17%
Poorly correlated
-6.48%
HTWSF - CUCSF
5%
Poorly correlated
-0.74%
MYTEF - CUCSF
1%
Poorly correlated
N/A
FRTAY - CUCSF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
TRKNY - CUCSF
0%
Poorly correlated
N/A
More

HTWSF and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor tells us that HTWSF and LBTYA have been poorly correlated (+25% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that HTWSF and LBTYA's prices will move in lockstep.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To HTWSF
1D Price
Change %
HTWSF100%
-0.74%
LBTYA - HTWSF
25%
Poorly correlated
-1.85%
SFTBY - HTWSF
24%
Poorly correlated
-1.64%
LBTYK - HTWSF
23%
Poorly correlated
-2.05%
SKM - HTWSF
23%
Poorly correlated
-0.36%
VDMCY - HTWSF
22%
Poorly correlated
-0.02%
More